Ian Kershaw Chief Executive Northern Education · PDF fileTrojan Horse Investigation - System Failure The Trojan Horse Investigation System Failure and British Values Ian Kershaw Chief

Trojan Horse Investigation - System Failure

The Trojan Horse Investigation

System Failure and British Values

Ian Kershaw

Chief Executive

Northern Education Trust


The Investigation Team

Northern Education

Ian Kershaw - MD Northern Education

Paul McHugh - Previously headteacher and NCA

John Collings - Previously Director of Children’s Services

Peter Parish - Previously Deputy Director Children’s Services

David Anstead - Previously Senior HMI

Eversheds

Sarah Jones - Partner

Peter Jones - Partner

Frances Woodhead - Partner


Overview

Birmingham service a large population of students; there

are 437 schools in the city (320 maintained schools and

117 academies), many of them highly successful in

meeting the educational and social needs of children.

There are many examples of good schools and good

governance.

My investigation dealt with a small section of schools

where there were serious concerns reported to me.


The Trojan Horse Letter – A Five Step Plan

Step 1 Identify in a densely populated locality that you want to target.

Start with the poorest performing first as they will be easiest to

influence and take over.

Step 2 Select a group of Salafi parents within the school community.

When the parents have been identified, start to turn them against

the head teacher and leadership team. Tell each parent that the

school is corrupting their children with sex education, teaching

about homosexuals, making children pray Christian prayers and

take part in mixed swimming and sports.

Step 3 Install a governor to ‘drip feed’ ideals for an Islamic school. Once

successful, the governor will be moved to another school, to

distance them from any troubles and to allow them to do the same

to a new school.


The Trojan Horse Letter – A Five Step Plan

Step 4 Identify ‘weak and disgruntled’ staff and encourage them to

complain to prompt an investigation, preferably and external

investigation, so that the head teacher resigns or is sacked.

Step 5 Instigate an anonymous and named letter campaign to governors,

local MPs, education authorities, Ofsted, Governor Support, the

local papers and the DfE to keep pressure on the head teacher

and place doubt in the minds of stakeholders. This will weaken the

head teacher’s resolve until they give up.

The Trojan horse letter says that the plan is simple – “It is about people

seeing our intentions as respectable and our being accepted by the key

stakeholders such as the Director of Education and the City Council .. This

is about causing the maximum amount of organized (sic) chaos.”


Terms of Reference

The terms of reference for the investigation asked me to

report on the following:


Findings

The evidence does not support a conclusion that there was a systematic

plot to take over schools.

However, elements of the five steps were present in a large number of

the schools considered as part of the investigation.

There were ‘activists’ who regarded their role of being a governor as a

means to an end. Where they judged a school to be failing the students,

they saw their role as one of leading change through the replacement of

school leadership and an improper manipulation of school governance.

There was evidence that there were individuals who were connected to

each other who had been seeking to promote and encourage Islamic

principles in schools, for example, by seeking to introduce Islamic

collective worship, or raising objections to elements of the curriculum that

are viewed as anti –Islamic (eg sex education, mixed PE, citizenship)


Findings

The evidence suggested that there was a pattern to the behaviour of

‘activist’ governors translating their agenda into:

- placing demands upon head teachers to modify curriculum

provision which denies students their right to access a broad and

balanced curriculum, including the right to understand other

world religions and the right to sex and relationship education

- placing inappropriate demands on head teachers by repeatedly

requesting information

- being overly challenging and sometimes aggressive in

management of head teachers

- undermining headteachers during Ofsted inspections

- interference in operational matters

- inappropriate appointment of friends and relatives


Findings

There were examples of governing bodies removing head teachers or

members of the LT, or causing disruption to their roles. This has been

manifested either in explicit campaigns to remove specific members of

staff or by the general behaviour of certain governors, or governing

body, to bully or harass a headteacher or seek to remove them without

due process. This has gone beyond the governing body’s role of

“Holding the head teacher to account......”

It was clear that in some governing bodies there have been individuals

who have shown an utter disregard for the Nolan principles, rejecting

responsibility for displaying integrity, objectivity and honesty in all matters

related to governance. These governing bodies did not see it as their role

to ensure that some members of the board act as guardians of good

behaviour through processes of audit and risk against a range of

responsibilities that governors hold.


Impact – pupils and students

In some schools and academies pupils and students did not

have access to :

– a broad and balanced curriculum

– appropriate sex or relationship education

– a balanced science education

– equal rights for girls to participate in sports or PE

– a balanced religious education

– appropriate worship


Impact - staff

In some schools and academies the evidence showed that:

– a number of headteachers and senior staff were removed

inappropriately

– a higher than normal number of senior staff left via

compromise agreements

– headteachers and senior staff resigned under the weight of

bullying and harassment

– people appointed to posts inappropriately

– staff were working in a climate of fear


Conclusions – system failures

Monitoring risk

– LA resource reductions

– LA focus on only schools that require improvement or in special

measures weakened intelligence about others

– Failure to systematically collect or analyse data and intelligence

(financial, complaints, whistleblowing, soft intelligence)

– Over-reliance upon Ofsted ratings and exam results by LA, DfE

and Education Funding Agency

– Ofsted intelligence weakened by ‘outstanding’ schools not being

subject to normal inspection regime



Monitoring risk

– Complaints data not co-ordinated within council and therefore

not analysed

– Different LA services working in silos

– Lack of shared intelligence about schools and academies

between LA, DfE, EFA and Ofsted

– Lack of robust process of due diligence by DfE in ascertaining

capacity or suitability of multi academy trust to undertake

further sponsorship of academies



Complaints handling

– Issues about conduct of LA in dealing with complaints about

LA governing bodies without investigation

– LA unclear about how complaints from staff or parents about

academy sponsors or governors behaviour can be handled

– LA accepted that resolution of complaints about head

teachers can be dealt with via compromise agreements

– LA culture of not wanting to address difficult issues with

governance in some schools for fear of being accused of

being racist or Islamaphobic.



Complaints handling

– Whistleblowing process ineffective and not trusted by

employees

– Commitment to community cohesion, at times, overrode

commitment to doing what is right

– Lack of capacity by LA to robustly undertake investigations

into complaints about governance or leadership in schools



Policy

– There was no overarching LA policy or strategy describing the

kinds of relationship it wished to promote and pursue with

stakeholders in the process of supporting or challenging

schools to deliver high quality education no matter the status

of the school.

– There was no alignment of the schooling system with

regeneration or community cohesion strategies.

– The LA did not have an integrated approach toward provision

of support and challenge to governance, financial probity

management, employee relations, school improvement, or

legal employment services.

– School and governors support services had a conflict of

interest as a service provider and as a supervisory body.



Ofsted and other stakeholders

– Ofsted failed to identify dysfunctional governance and

instances of the manipulation of a balanced curriculum when

conducting routine inspections.

– The LA cannot rely on Ofsted to assess the governance in

schools or academies.

– Ofsted does not inspect financial management, the quality or

breadth of the curriculum offered or the adequacy of

governance in overseeing these matters

– It was not possible to discern a relationship between the LA,

Ofsted, the DfE or the EFA in the process of sharing critical

data and intelligence.



SACRE, RE and assemblies

– SACRE, as an advisory body, has no powers to monitor or

evaluate the quality of religious education in schools or

academies.

– The LA no longer monitors curriculum provision

– Ofsted Section 5 inspections do not routinely monitor RE

curriculum provision.

– Determinations for academies not to provide a daily act of

Christian worship are approved or not by the Secretary of

State.

– There is no obligation or right of SACRE to specify what form

an act of worship should take if it is not to be a Christian act.


Key issues for the system

– Local Authorities’ policy toward working in partnership with

stakeholders

– Role of Directors of Children’s Services

– Key stakeholders of LAs, DfE, EFA and Ofsted working in

partnership to share intelligence about governance, leadership and

improvement

– DfE/EFA due diligence procedures

– Ofsted inspection process

– Governor selection, induction and training

– Head teacher induction and training about governance

– Role of LA governors

– Training of chairs of governors

– Audit and risk processes for governing bodies and sponsors


HMCI advice note to Rt Hon Michael Gove

1. A culture of fear and intimidation has developed in some of the

schools since their previous inspection.

2. Some head teachers reported that there has been an organised

campaign to target certain schools in Birmingham in order to

alter their character and ethos

3. Birmingham City Council has failed to support a number of

schools in their efforts to keep pupils safe from the potential risks

of radicalisation and extremism. It has not dealt adequately with

complaints from head teachers about the conduct of governors.

4. Her Majesty’s Inspectors identified breaches of funding

agreements

5. In several of the schools inspected, children are being badly

prepared for life in modern Britain.


Ofsted key concerns in five schools

– RE teaching often inspires students to work to high standards….

but understanding of other religions is scant as the curriculum

focuses primarily on the study of Islam.

– Leaders do not sufficiently develop pupils’ understanding of

different customs, traditions or religions .. in Britain. This does not

prepare pupils adequately for life in modern Britain

– Pupils have limited knowledge of religious beliefs other than

Islam……Teaching is inadequate because it does not achieve the

necessary gains in pupils’ knowledge, skills and understanding of

all the major religions


Ofsted key concerns in five schools

– The curriculum … does not foster an appreciation of, and respect

for, pupils’ own or other cultures. It does not promote tolerance

and harmony between different cultural traditions.

– Group of governors …are endeavouring to promote a .. narrow

faith-based ideology in .. a maintained and non-faith academy.

– Students focus almost entirely on Islam. Students are invited to

develop moral understanding through .. Islamic assemblies.

However, no opportunities exist for non-Muslims to attend

alternative assemblies.


HMCI recommendations to SoS

– The Department for Education (DfE) should continue to reinforce

the requirement on all schools to provide a broad and balanced

curriculum and promote British values.

– The DfE should ensure that leadership and governance training

programmes emphasise the importance of promoting British

values, including tolerance and mutual understanding.

– The DfE should continue to remind schools of the legal

requirement to publish key information, including curriculum

plans, on school websites.

– Ofsted will continue to check curriculum information on school

websites as part of its ongoing risk assessment procedures to

determine whether no-notice inspection is necessary.


DFE Guidance November 2014

Through their provision of SMSC, schools should:

– enable students to develop their self-knowledge, self-esteem and

self-confidence;

– enable students to distinguish right from wrong and to respect the

civil and criminal laws of England;

– encourage students to accept responsibility for their behaviour,

show initiative, and to understand how they can contribute

positively to the lives of those living and working in the locality of

the school and to society more widely;


DFE Guidance November 2014

– enable students to acquire a broad general knowledge of and

respect for public institutions and services in England;

– further tolerance and harmony between different cultural

traditions by enabling students to acquire an appreciation of and

respect for their own and other cultures;

– encourage respect for other people; and

– encourage respect for democracy and support for participation in

the democratic processes, including respect for the basis on

which the law is made and applied in England.


British values - the DFE view

The understanding and knowledge expected of pupils as a result of

schools promoting fundamental British values includes:

– an understanding of how citizens can influence decision-making

through the democratic process;

– an appreciation that living under the rule of law protects individual

citizens and is essential for their wellbeing and safety;

– an understanding that there is a separation of power between the

executive and the judiciary, and that while some public bodies

such as the police and the army can be held to account through

Parliament, others such as the courts maintain independence;



– an understanding that the freedom to choose and hold other

faiths and beliefs is protected in law;

– an acceptance that other people having different faiths or beliefs

to oneself (or having none) should be accepted and tolerated,

and should not be the cause of prejudicial or discriminatory

behaviour;

and

– an understanding of the importance of identifying and combatting

discrimination.



– an acceptance that other people having different faiths or beliefs

to oneself (or having none) should be accepted and tolerated,

and should not be the cause of prejudicial or discriminatory

behaviour; and

– an understanding of the importance of identifying and combatting

discrimination


Ofsted view of British values

Under social development

– acceptance and engagement with the fundamental

British values of democracy, the rule of law, individual

liberty and mutual respect and tolerance of those with

different faiths and beliefs; the pupils develop and

demonstrate skills and attitudes that will allow them to

participate fully in and contribute positively to life in

modern Britain.


Ofsted - view of British values

– understanding and appreciation of the range of

different cultures within school and further afield as an

essential element of their preparation for life in modern

Britain

– knowledge of Britain's democratic parliamentary

system and its central role in shaping our history and

values, and in continuing to develop Britain


Ofsted - view of British values

Under cultural development:

• understanding and appreciation of the wide range of

cultural influences that have shaped their own heritage

and those of others

• understanding and appreciation of the range of

different cultures within school and further afield as an

essential element of their preparation for life in modern

Britain

• knowledge of Britain’s democratic parliamentary

system and its central role in shaping our history and

values, and in continuing to develop Britain


Top tips

Conveying and explaining British values is everyone’s job

British values are to be found in song, dance, sport, poetry,

music, literature, history, geography, film, photography and

cartoons…………

British values are inclusive of all faiths and of none.

British values come from multiple cultures, different classes

and different genetic pools.

Children are able to describe British values of fairness,

honesty and tolerance, often more generously than adults.

Children need opportunities to meet and see people from

different cultures, ethnic groups, classes, religious beliefs and

none, as well as be able to express their own views.


Top tips

“Every man should have a built-in automatic crap

detector operating inside him.”

Ernest Hemingway, 1954

http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/65aug/6508manning.htm

Documents

Ian Kershaw Chief Executive Northern Education · PDF fileTrojan Horse Investigation - System Failure The Trojan Horse Investigation System Failure and British Values Ian Kershaw Chief